A. Field of the Invention
Among other things, the present invention is related to a surgical implant or cage that can be inserted into a cavity that has been created by removing spinal tissue. The generally wedge-like trapezoidal shaped cage includes a series of trapezoidal dividers or braces, first and second universal corner posts and lateral universal posts manufactured in such a way that the surgeon can see through the cage's openings prior to the addition of substances. First and second lateral brakes are incorporated into the spinal implant, and the lateral brakes can include one or more bores for receiving fasteners. Select preferred embodiments of the current spinal implant can be provided with superior and inferior plates having bores that can receive fasteners. Still other preferred embodiments utilize one or more brakes that are connectable to the lateral supports of the spinal implant. And still other preferred embodiments can employ an end cap to assists with the stabilization of the spinal implant in a surgically created cavity.
B. Description of the Previous Art
Any discussion of references cited in this Description of the Previous Art merely summarizes the disclosures of the cited references and Applicant makes no admission that any cited reference or portion thereof is relevant prior art. Applicant reserves the right to challenge the accuracy, relevancy and veracity of the cited references.
1) U.S. Published Patent Application No. 20030125739 A1—Bagga, et al. discloses a bioactive spinal implant and method of manufacture. Among other things, it does not appear that the Bagga invention practices the use of a series of dividers, universal corner posts, universal posts or bars.
2) U.S. Pat. No. 6,767,367 B1—Michelson enables a spinal fusion implant having deployable bone engaging projections. Michelson teaches that the '367 implant 300 has a rotatable member 320 that is preferably frustoconical in shape. Rotatable member 320 has bone engaging projections 332 adapted to penetrably engage the bone of the adjacent vertebral bodies. Bone engaging projections 332 are preferably configured such that in a retracted position, implant 300 may be linearly inserted into the disc space. After implant 300 is inserted into the disc space, bone engaging projections 332 are moved to a deployed position to penetrably engage the endplates of each adjacent vertebral body and prevent the expulsion of implant 300 from the disc space.
3) U.S. Pat. No. 6,537,320 B1—Michelson enables a self-broaching, rotatable, push-in interbody spinal fusion implant and method for its deployment. Among other things, it does not appear that the Michelson invention practices the use of a series of dividers, universal corner posts, universal posts or bars.
4) U.S. Pat. No. 5,609,635—Michelson enables a lordotic interbody spinal fusion implant. The Michelson Summary of the Invention teaches, “In the preferred embodiment of the modular implant, the implant is again wedge-shaped in the side elevational view and is taller at its insertion end than at its trailing end.” Being taller at an insertion end than at the trailing end is a teaching that is incompatible with the current spinal implant. Further, among other things, it does not appear that the Michelson invention practices the use of a series of dividers, universal corner posts, universal posts or bars.
5) U.S. Pat. No. 6,302,914 B1—Michelson enables a lordotic interbody spinal fusion implant. The '914 patent is a continuation patent of the U.S. Pat. No. 5,609,635—Michelson patent and enables the same limitations as the '635 patent.
6) U.S. Pat. No. 6,066,175—Henderson, et al. enables a fusion stabilization chamber. Henderson discloses a mesh cage 41, barrel vaults 48 and 49 and flanges 50 and 51 to anchor the cage. The cage is preferably rectangular when viewed from the top or the bottom. Among other things, it does not appear that the Henderson invention practices the use of a series of dividers, universal corner posts, universal posts or bars.
7) U.S. Pat. No. 5,766,252—Henry, et al. enables an interbody spinal prosthetic implant and method. Henry requires a threaded hole 38 to practice the '252 invention. Among other things, it does not appear that the Henry invention practices the use of a series of dividers, universal corner posts, universal posts or bars.
8) U.S. Pat. No. 5,425,772—Brantigan enables a prosthetic implant for intervertebral spinal fusion. The '772 device practices traverse teeth or serrations 19 where the teeth have sharp peaks 19a, slopping walls 19b and valleys 19c. Among other things, it does not appear that the Brantigan invention practices the use of a series of dividers, universal corner posts, universal posts or bars.
9) U.S. Pat. No. 5,147,402—Bohler, et al. enables an implant for ingrowth of osseous tissue. Among other things, it does not appear that the Bohler invention practices the use of a series of dividers, universal corner posts, universal posts or bars.
10) U.S. Pat. No. 6,746,484—Liu, et al. enables a spinal implant. Among other things, Liu teaches an implant 1 having an elongate hollow body 3, parallel longitudinal walls 4 and terminal ends 5 and 6 including threaded holes 11a. Among other things, it does not appear that the Liu invention practices the use of a series of dividers, universal corner posts, universal posts or bars.
11) U.S. Pat. No. 6,231,610 B1—Geisler enables an anterior cervical column support device. The '610 apparatus utilizes serrations on the load bearing surfaces and two screw holes. Among other things, it does not appear that the Geisler invention practices the use of a series of dividers, universal corner posts, universal posts or bars.
12) U.S. Pat. No. 6,660,038 B2—Boyer, et al. enables skeletal reconstruction cages. The Boyer patent discloses an end cap 210 suitable for coupling to central shaft 160 includes an outer wall 212, as well as a central hole disposed along axis 213 with a lower inner wall 214, an upper inner wall 216, and an inner ridge portion 218. Notably, while outer wall 176 of central shaft 160 is generally circular, outer wall 212 of end cap 210 is generally oblong, so that a generally I-shaped skeletal reconstruction cage may be formed when a pair of end caps 210 are placed on central shaft 160. Among other things, it does not appear that the Boyer invention practices the use of a series of dividers, universal corner posts, universal posts or bars.
13) U.S. Pat. No. 6,491,724—Ferree enables a spinal fusion cage with lordosis correction. Among other things, Ferree teaches an anterior portion 112 that includes mating members 120 and 122 with teeth 124 or other features to form a locking or ratchet mechanism that is used to alter the height of the cage. Among other things, it does not appear that the Ferree invention practices the use of a series of dividers, universal corner posts, universal posts or bars.
14) U.S. Pat. No. 6,117,174—Nolan enables a spinal implant device that has disc 14 made of the same material as body 12. Among other things, it does not appear that the Nolan invention practices the use of a series of dividers, universal corner posts, universal posts or bars.
15) U.S. Published Patent Application No. 20070016295—Boyd discloses a reinforced molded implant formed of cortical bone. Boyd reads, “Implant 10 defines a longitudinal axis 11 and includes a first strut 12, a second strut 14 spaced from first strut 12, and cross-member 16 extending therebetween. First strut 12 and second strut 14 are each positioned to lie in a plane substantially parallel to longitudinal axis 11. Implant 10 includes at least one additional cross-member 16 A connecting first strut 12 and second strut 14. It is understood that in alternative embodiments implant 10 can have one or a plurality of cross-members connecting first strut 12 to second strut 14.”
16) U.S. Pat. No. 6,090,143—Meriwether, et al. enables a box cage for intervertebral body fusion. Meriwether reads, “FIG. 6 illustrates a further embodiment of the invention which is a slight modification of that shown in FIG. 4. In the embodiment of FIG. 6, rather than having a rectangular longitudinal cross-section, it is trapezoidal such that the resulting cage member, indicated generally by numeral 110, is wedge-shaped. The assembled cage comprises a box-like base 112 and a cover 114 dimensioned to fit over the base much like the cover on a shirt box. The height dimension of the rightmost ends of the base and cover are greater than the height dimension of the corresponding, opposed left side ends, thus providing the desired wedge shape. Upwardly projecting ribs 116 and 118 extend along the rear and front side edges, respectfully, and likewise, the base 112 includes longitudinally extending ribs 120 and 122 projecting downwardly from the undersurface of the base along the side edges thereof The right and left ends of the base 112 and the cover 114 include semi-circular cut-outs as at 124 and 126 and 128-130 such that when the cover 114 is placed upon the base 112, circular apertures are formed. These apertures are adapted to receive a tapered screw 132 therein. The slope of the taper of the screw is designed to correspond to that of the cage assembly 110 such that when the screw 132 is threaded into the circular opening defined by arcuate cut-outs 124 and 126 and advanced by turning until the leading end 134 of the screw enters the circular aperture 128-130, further turning of the screw will raise the case cover 114 relative to its base 112, allowing adjustment of the cage height following positioning thereof between adjacent vertebral bodies.”
17) U.S. Pat. No. 6,159,245—Meriwether, et al. enables a box cage for intervertebral body fusion. The '245 Meriwether patent is a continuation of U.S. Pat. No. 6,090,143—Meriwether, et al. and teaches the same limitations as the '143 patent.
18) U.S. Pat. No. 6,432,107—Ferree enables enhanced surface area spinal fusion devices. The '107 patent teaches, “The device 200 fits into slots 204 and 206 made in upper and lower vertebrae 208 and 210, respectively, allowing the lower section to fuse within the body of the lower vertebrae 210, and the upper section to fuse within the body of the upper vertebrae 208. Thus, in contrast to existing devices, the device 200 and the alternative embodiments disclosed herein feature considerably more intimate contact with cancellous bone due to the fact that the device is inserted directly into the cavities 204 and 206. Rather than a relatively minor amount of scraping of the end plates of the vertebrae to be distracted, the entire end portions of the device 200 which penetrate the upper and lower vertebrae make contact with cancellous bone, thereby enhancing fusion considerably. FIG. 2B is a cross-section of a vertebrae of FIG. 2A as viewed from a top-down perspective, showing how the device fits tightly along the entire walls of the channels created in the vertebrae.” Among other things, the Ferree device does provide a series of dividers or receptacles visible to the surgeon after insertion into the surgical cavity.
19) U.S. Pat. No. 6,569,201—Moumene, et al. enables a hybrid composite interbody fusion device. Moumene's Osteoconductive pore 2 forms a void 23 within the support and defines an inner surface 13, and opens onto side surface openings 19, 21 formed in side surfaces 7, 9, and the void section 23 is suitable for housing a bone growth material such as bone chips (not shown). Among other things, it does not appear that the Moumene invention practices the use of a series of dividers, universal corner posts, universal posts or bars.